Society, state, and fear: Managing national security at the boundary between complacency and panic
Why do states sometimes treat the public's response to threats as itself a threat to national security? Even as the external threats facing the United States have changed over time – from the Soviet Union to "terrorists of global reach" – the threat to national security posed by a fea...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Dissertation |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
ProQuest Dissertations & Theses
01.01.2012
|
| Subjects: | |
| ISBN: | 9781267472779, 1267472774 |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Why do states sometimes treat the public's response to threats as itself a threat to national security? Even as the external threats facing the United States have changed over time – from the Soviet Union to "terrorists of global reach" – the threat to national security posed by a fearful public has remained a recurring worry occupying the attention of policymakers at the highest levels of government. While the literature in IR and security – realist, liberal, and constructivist – generally assumes the public's fear of a threat to be essential for state survival, fear is a double edged sword. Drawing on Hobbesian state theory, I argue that public fear will be treated by the state as a threat when the object and intensity of the public's fears does not align with the state's understanding of the threat environment. This enables a challenge from below to the state's national security priorities and policies, prompting state intervention. When the public does not sufficiently fear a threat the state intends to mobilize against, the state will counteract "complacency" with fearmongering. Conversely, when the public fears a threat that the state is either unwilling or unable to address directly, the state seeks to counteract "panic" through reassurance. Because both public complacency and panic undermine state autonomy, the state has a compelling interest in managing whether and how existential emergencies rise to the top of the public agenda. The dissertation investigates the role of public fear in the shaping of national security priorities and policies in two case studies, the Eisenhower administration's response to Sputnik and the Bush administration's response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The cases show that managing public fear – the public relations of security – is central to how state's conduct national security and a core logic of government. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | SourceType-Dissertations & Theses-1 ObjectType-Dissertation/Thesis-1 content type line 12 |
| ISBN: | 9781267472779 1267472774 |